CNN:Are China's economic statistics accurate?

[Guynextdoor2]

LOL, you must be joking.

The system is reforming as it is. And Chinese people have patience, we can wait as long as it takes.

Personally I think we have to become developed first before we carry out major political reforms. Just like the other East Asian nations did it.

It's not risky at all, it is following a well established pattern. First industrialization, then after reaching developed status, political reforms. Pretty much all the major developed countries today followed this pattern in history.

India is the one taking a risky path, by having political reforms first, then trying to "skip" the industrial stage straight to services. Which has never been done before.

Oh no thanks for the advice- we will live with our stupid attitude and since we're uneducated we'll go straight for democracy while blissfully ingoring complex and intellectual thing like why we should have 'Industrial' stage and then go for services and not do political reforms and such.
As far as the supposed chinese experience is concerned- I am yet to see a country where prosperity has not brought in demands of representation. I will not believe this is the case until I see it with my own eyes.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Oh no thanks for the advice- we will live with our stupid attitude and since we're uneducated we'll go straight for democracy while blissfully ingoring complex and intellectual thing like why we should have 'Industrial' stage and then go for services and not do political reforms and such.
As far as the supposed chinese experience is concerned- I am yet to see a country where prosperity has not brought in demands of representation. I will not believe this is the case until I see it with my own eyes.

Well India has now decided to go back to the industrial stage, and they are currently trying to set up a manufacturing base.

The reason is because mass manufacturing is the only real way to provide mass low-paid employment to a very large number of people. It also encourages urbanization, and importantly it requires the setting up of a efficient and effective nation-wide system of infrastructure, which is the only way for national manufacturing to be competitive.

All the major developed economies right now had their own industrial stage once. It set up the basic framework and the basic infrastructure to continue nation-building.

 

[StarCraft_ZT]

LOL, you must be joking.

The system is reforming as it is. And Chinese people have patience, we can wait as long as it takes.

Personally I think we have to become developed first before we carry out major political reforms. Just like the other East Asian nations did it.

It's not risky at all, it is following a well established pattern. First industrialization, then after reaching developed status, political reforms. Pretty much all the major developed countries today followed this pattern in history.

India is the one taking a risky path, by having political reforms first, then trying to "skip" the industrial stage straight to services. Which has never been done before.

totally agree with you Chinese Dragon.

That is my political ideology too.

First become industrialized, and then a complete and wide range social welfare system established, and after that political reform.

I think a person who can afford himself and family with enough food, clothing, education and medical care are more capable of expressing a mature political idea than those Indian poor people who are struggling for not starving to death. Those poor Indian people even cannot feed themselves, what brilliant political idea can you expect from them?

 

[Guynextdoor2]

Well India has now decided to go back to the industrial stage, and they are currently trying to set up a manufacturing base.

The reason is because mass manufacturing is the only real way to provide mass low-paid employment to a very large number of people. It also encourages urbanization, and importantly it requires the setting up of a efficient and effective nation-wide system of infrastructure, which is the only way for national manufacturing to be competitive.

All the major developed economies right now had their own industrial stage once. It set up the basic framework and the basic infrastructure to continue nation-building.

Oh man! Seriously. COuntries aren't as regimentally planned as you say they are. At the time (1990s) we found that we had large pools of people who could speak english and we could also evolve an easy system for people to learn Software coding- so we just went for it. The intention to become a manufacturing basewas always there but we could not get a consensus on areas like labor laws, land acquisition etc. The reason why manufacturing is picking up is because we have finally managed to come to some consensus. In the real world people make use of opportunities as they come. It's not A+B>

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Oh man! Seriously. COuntries aren't as regimentally planned as you say they are. At the time (1990s) we found that we had large pools of people who could speak english and we could also evolve an easy system for people to learn Software coding- so we just went for it. The intention to become a manufacturing basewas always there but we could not get a consensus on areas like labor laws, land acquisition etc. The reason why manufacturing is picking up is because we have finally managed to come to some consensus. In the real world people make use of opportunities as they come. It's not A+B>

In the real world, nation-building is a serious business, the lives and welfare of millions of people depends on it. Or in the case of China and India, the lives and welfare of hundreds of millions of people depends on it.

So yes, it is planned.

And no, national leaders do not just wait around for opportunities to come. If they are any good at their job they will be pro-actively seeking those opportunities.

 

[kena]

Well India has now decided to go back to the industrial stage, and they are currently trying to set up a manufacturing base.

The reason is because mass manufacturing is the only real way to provide mass low-paid employment to a very large number of people. It also encourages urbanization, and importantly it requires the setting up of a efficient and effective nation-wide system of infrastructure, which is the only way for national manufacturing to be competitive.

All the major developed economies right now had their own industrial stage once. It set up the basic framework and the basic infrastructure to continue nation-building.

Where is the demand for all that industrial products in a world mired in recession? In a way, it was a good division of labour - China going for industries and India for services, so that the two most populous countries could share a bit in the West's prosperity. I m of the opinion the peak has already passed and neither of the countries is going anywhere much from here. In fact, as wages rise, their status will only undergo attrition as corporates shift their operation to lower wage countries.

 

[Guynextdoor2]

In the real world, nation-building is a serious business, the lives and welfare of millions of people depends on it. Or in the case of China and India, the lives and welfare of hundreds of millions of people depends on it.

So yes, it is planned.

And no, national leaders do not just wait around for opportunities to come. If they are any good at their job they will be pro-actively seeking those opportunities.

No - there are just broad strokes. WHat are you saying that we should have let go of the IT outsourcing businesses becuase they were services and not industry? Manufacturing or no- they give us 100 billion in rev. We should just let go of that?

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

No - there are just broad strokes. WHat are you saying that we should have let go of the IT outsourcing businesses becuase they were services and not industry? Manufacturing or no- they give us 100 billion in rev. We should just let go of that?

No, I'm not saying that at all.

I'm saying that all the current major developed economies went through an industrial stage before moving to a focus on services, for good reason. Mass low-paid employment (as in tens or hundreds of millions of jobs), urbanization, and to set up an efficient and effective national infrastructure.

None of them successfully managed to "skip" straight to services.

@Guynextdoor, please check out the article in this thread:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/264018-rage-emotion-indian-experiences-visit-china.html

 

[Guynextdoor2]

No, I'm not saying that at all.

I'm saying that all the current major developed economies went through an industrial stage before moving to services, for good reason. Mass low-paid employment (as in tens or hundreds of millions of jobs), urbanization, and to set up an efficient and effective national infrastructure.

None of them successfully managed to "skip" straight to services.

@Guynextdoor, please check out the article in this thread:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/264018-rage-emotion-indian-experiences-visit-china.html

I have read that article and I think the man who wrote it is an @$$hole. WHy rage only when in China? WHy not when in New York or Frace? Development is development and in those places we are comparing democracies.

An any case, I don't understand your point. Who is concerned about whether we 'went straight' to services or not? We saw an opportunity, took it and got both employment and revenues- we'll leave analysis and history books to writers. WRT manufacturing there just was no consensus, especially on labor laws. Now at long last we've managed tto get a lot of people on board and are managing good working pricinples so big projects (DMIC etc.) on manufacturing have begun to move. Could it have been done better and earlier? probably. But we just couldn't get things in place for it- that's all there is to it.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

I have read that article and I think the man who wrote it is an @$$hole. WHy rage only when in China? WHy not when in New York or Frace? Development is development and in those places we are comparing democracies.

An any case, I don't understand your point. Who is concerned about whether we 'went straight' to services or not? We saw an opportunity, took it and got both employment and revenues- we'll leave analysis and history books to writers. WRT manufacturing there just was no consensus, especially on labor laws. Now at long last we've managed tto get a lot of people on board and are managing good working pricinples so big projects (DMIC etc.) on manufacturing have begun to move. Could it have been done better and earlier? probably. But we just couldn't get things in place for it- that's all there is to it.

I figured you would be a little more motivated, since the lives and welfare of hundreds of millions of your fellow citizens is at stake in the issue of development.

 

[Guynextdoor2]

I figured you would be a little more motivated, since the lives and welfare of hundreds of millions of your fellow citizens is at stake in the issue of development.

In democracies you cannot move until there is a workable consensus on policy issues. And there have been HUGE clashes on labor laws as well as land acquisition (both important for manufacturing). The representatives who are clashing are ultimately the representatives of these fellow citizens and therefore their voice. wE can't order executive fiats one fine day (like you) and get everything rolling. The idea that you 'know better' is both arrogant and silly.

If you're proposing that Indian economic planners, under a sense of misplaced pride or ego decided to 'skip' industrial growth, that's silly. More industries means more jobs and more votes. If it could have been done faster, it would have been done.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

In democracies you cannot move until there is a workable consensus on policy issues. And there have been HUGE clashes on labor laws as well as land acquisition (both important for manufacturing). The representatives who are clashing are ultimately the representatives of these fellow citizens and therefore their voice. wE can't order executive fiats one fine day (like you) and get everything rolling. The idea that you 'know better' is both arrogant and silly.

If you're proposing that Indian economic planners, under a sense of misplaced pride or ego decided to 'skip' industrial growth, that's silly. More industries means more jobs and more votes. If it could have been done faster, it would have been done.

Democracies develop just as well or better than any other system.

I've heard this same tired excuse over and over again. There are plenty of democracies in the world that can get things done efficiently and effectively.

I'm done arguing with you. From your Modi hate threads, I have to conclude that you are simply anti-development. For India anyway.

 

[Guynextdoor2]

Democracies develop just as well or better than any other system.

I've heard this same tired excuse over and over again. There are plenty of democracies in the world that can get things done efficiently and effectively.

I'm done arguing with you. From your Modi hate threads, I have to conclude that you are simply anti-development. For India anyway.

Excuse? This is the fundamental working principle of democracy and any cost on this front is deemed acceptable man. Jesus! Now I have modi supporters in CHina too!!

 

[WhiteMansBurden]

Excuse? This is the fundamental working principle of democracy and any cost on this front is deemed acceptable man. Jesus! Now I have modi supporters in CHina too!!

My people invented democracy, and we use it to this day in almost very nation we have. At the same time, we are the most prosperous and powerful nations.

It's clear that the excuse that you can't get anything done because you are a democracy is false. Our countries didn't even use democracy as a tool to catch up. We used it going forward, and we still invented 99% of all modern technologies.

Not a good excuse.

 

[Guynextdoor2]

My people invented democracy, and we use it to this day in almost very nation we have. At the same time, we are the most prosperous and powerful nations.

It's clear that the excuse that you can't get anything done because you are a democracy is false. Our countries didn't even use democracy as a tool to catch up. We used it going forward, and we still invented 99% of all modern technologies.

Not a good excuse.

Your people didn't invent democracy....